Jones v. Vaught

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
JEREMY D. JONES,
Petitioner,
v.
T. VAUGHT, Warden – FCI Sandstone,
Respondent.
Case No. 25-CV-4488 (JRT/JFD)
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On December 22, 2025, this Court pointed out several problems with the petition
for a writ of habeas corpus filed by Petitioner Jeremy D. Jones and granted him 30 days in
which to file an amended habeas petition. (See Dkt. No. 4.) That deadline has now passed,
and Mr. Jones has not filed an amended habeas petition or responded in any way to the
Court’s Order.1 Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the December 22 Order, the Court
recommends that the habeas petition be denied without prejudice and that this matter be
dismissed.
1 There is reason to believe that this matter has become moot. The inmate locator operated
by the Federal Bureau of Prisons indicates that Mr. Jones has been transferred out of prison
and into a residential reentry center. The only relief sought by Mr. Jones in his habeas
petition was a speedier transfer away from prison. If Mr. Jones has, in fact, been transferred
to a residential reentry center, then there is no further relief that the Court could grant in
this proceeding, making the habeas petition moot and depriving the Court of jurisdiction
over the proceeding. If so, then the result would be the same—the habeas petition should
be denied without prejudice and this matter dismissed.
CASE 0:25-cv-04488-JRT-JFD Doc. 5 Filed 02/06/26 Page 1 of 2

2
Accordingly, 	based 	on 	the 	foregoing, 	and 	on 	all 	of 	the 	files, 	records, 	and
proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED THAT:
1. 	The petition for a writ of habeas corpus filed by Petitioner Jeremy D. Jones
(Dkt. No. 1) be DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and
2. 	This matter be DISMISSED.
Dated: February 6, 2026 	s/ John F. Docherty_____________
JOHN F. DOCHERTY
United States Magistrate Judge
NOTICE
Filing Objections: This Report and Recommendation is not an order or judgment of the
District Court and is therefore not appealable directly to the Eighth Circuit Court of
Appeals. Under Local Rule 72.2(b)(1), “a party may file and serve specific written
objections to a magistrate judge’s proposed finding and recommendations within 14 days
after being served a copy” of the Report and Recommendation. A party may respond to
those objections within 14 days after being served a copy of the objections. See D. Minn.
LR 72.2(b)(2). All objections and responses must comply with the word or line limits set
forth in Local Rule 72.2(c).
CASE 0:25-cv-04488-JRT-JFD Doc. 5 Filed 02/06/26 Page 2 of 2